Social constructionism
Social constructivism refers to a meta-theory in sociology that on the 1966 published book The Social Construction of Reality: based by Peter L. Berger and Thomas Luckmann (AKA The social construction of reality ).
The focus of social constructionism is to trace the ways in which the social reality and individual social phenomena are constructed. Examines the sociological method associated with it, how people produce social phenomena, and institutionalize this transfer by passing on to new generations in traditions. This involves the description of the institutions to social action, etc., but less about the search for causes and effects. Social reality is seen as something dynamic processual aspect, which is constantly produced and reproduced through the actions of people and their related thereto interpretations and world knowledge.
Many subsequent research directions as the gender studies and cultural studies relate to concepts of social constructivism.
- 5.1 sources
- 5.2 Literature
- 5.3 External links
- 5.4 See also
Definition
The term " social constructs " (or simply social constructs ) by-products are understood by countless human choices. An association of social constructs with legalities and results of divine will or nature itself is not accepted. This should not be interpreted as a radical Antideterminismus, however, the social constructivism understood as opposing idea approach to essentialism. Essentialism describes special ( social) phenomena as congenital, transhistorical core characteristics which independently of human consciousness, the existing structures of reality shape and determine.
The main focus of social constructivism is aimed to reveal the different ways of life and participation of individuals and groups in their perceived social construct of the world. This includes how social phenomena emerge as objectified ( a reality ) institutionalize, and are in turn shaped into traditions and cultures of people. The entire social structure is an ongoing, evolving process of change and adaptation, which is accepted by the people and driven by active participation. The interpretations, motives and knowledge of the people is the basis of the dynamic process. As social constructs are not created by nature, they must be constantly supported and sustained by human action and consciousness. The dynamic process also change as new generations with new participation and support can make and modify social constructs differently: What is justice and right, each generation decides for itself
Analysis: building a social construct
The term " social construct" has many different meanings for many different people. The Canadian philosopher Ian Hacking, who has lit a large number of books and articles entitled " The social construction of X" or " X Construction ", advocates that if something is to be socially constructed, it is true in short to the following two statements to:
( 0) At the present state of affairs X is assumed to be given; X appears to be inevitable.
( 1) X did not have to exist or would not like now must arise in the form. X, as it currently exists, is not given by nature, therefore, it is not inevitable.
Furthermore Hacking adds two more assertions to one of which is not always, but often assumed in the term social construct:
( 2) X is quite bad as it is now.
(3 ) We would be better off if X would no longer exist, if we had behind us or if we would transform radically.
Applications
Disaster sociology
In the disaster sociology is given the frequent form of " disasters " a sozialkonstruktivistisches approach close. Here in 2003 Robert Stallings various radical and moderate approaches has analytically and practically examined ( in: . Lars Clausen and others, eds, horrible social processes, Münster 2003).
Sociology of Technology
For application to the sociology of technology, see the Social Construction of Technology.
Sociology of Science
In the sociology of science is referred to as " social constructivism ," the idea that scientific facts are actually the result of processes of construction, and depending on the social situation of the laboratory, the research institution and the negotiation of research results within the laboratory.
Criticism
The so-called Sokal affair is cited (not only as an argument against post-modern trends in science as a whole, but also ) as an argument against social constructivism: There it is said that it has demonstrated with Sokal's "joke", that social constructivism is socially constructed. In fact, Alan Sokal points to this circularity of constructivism out just as he tried to demonstrate by means of several examples that the social environment, although a (usually only temporary ) may have effect on the scientific theory, but that the far more important and influential criteria principle stem for or against scientific theories of repeatable experiments and observations; the design, implementation and evaluation of experiments is, however, performed again by scientists ( = social beings ) as Karin Knorr Cetina 1984 - up shows what the natural sciences are trapped (see categories) in a circularity of the categorical.
Finally Sokal argues that outsiders due to lack of knowledge usually could not judge the reasons for which an explanatory model over another was preferred. So have results that are referred to as " socially motivated " by followers of social constructivism, actually mostly a plausible scientific reason which was a layman, however, not immediately clear. However, this is exactly plausibility an examined sociological object, because it deals with the closure of scientific controversies (and thus social processing ). There are extensive studies of sociologists Anthony Collins, who tried to show the social construction even supposedly objective scientific plausibility.
Anthony Giddens throws Berger and Luckmann against the neglect of the effect of social structures and the aspect of running time. These two aspects are fundamental to the use of social structures. Giddens ' alternative proposal is his so-called theory of structuration.
Ian Hacking criticized in the context of a discourse analysis of the now very broad and diverse tradition of social constructivism, inter alia, the inflationary and often unreflective use of the metaphor of " social construction ". He refers to a plethora of studies that investigate the pattern " The social construction of X" variety of phenomena. The Commission acknowledges that the evidence that something is socially constructed, eg liberating act in the face of the supposed " nature of things "; also have the metaphor of social construction long time unfolds a shocking effect by a dominant ideology was held an alternative. Meanwhile, the metaphor have however worn. So is now questionable, as the phenomena under investigation could ever be constructed differently than "social" and what role " construct " the meaning of meaning " building" or " assembly of parts " actually plays. Hacking calls for a differentiated use of the idea of social constructiveness, which would limit the social constructivism clearly.